Here is the Kommersant (12-16-09) article on which the RIA Novosti article is based. The founder of the IEA is identified by Kommersant as "former presidential adviser Andrei Illarionov," who does double-duty as an adviser on climate change for the Libertarian Cato Institute in Washington D.C. RIA Novosti omits Mr. Illarionov's name in their version of the story, as does Cuccinelli's brief against the EPA.

Climategate has already affected Russia. On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.

The Cuccinelli brief (pages 14-15)[new link here] is falsely citing the RIA Novosti (12-16-09) article when it identifies the alleged culprit as the CRU, instead of the Hadley Center. Perhaps Cuccinelli had to "fix" the RIA Novosti allegations in his brief to the EPA because the Hadley Center is responsible for sea-surface temperatures, not landtemperatures from weather stations. Perhaps RIA Novosti's unnamed Russian "experts" are propagandists who did not really understand the difference between the Hadley Centre and the CRU. Tellingly, RIA Novosti did not quote Putin's former economic adviser Illarionov by name, and they did not quote any Russian scientists who are climate experts, either.

Cuccinelli's brief claims:

On December 15, 2009---the very day that EPA announced the Endangerment Finding---the Russian Institute of Economic Analysis ("IEA") reported that CRUprobably tampered with Russian climate data and that the Russian meteorological station data do not support human-caused global warming. It was well established that CRU had dropped many Russian stations in the colder regions of the country supposedly because these stations were no longer maintained. The IEA stated that, on the contrary, the stations still report temperatures but that CRU ignores the results.

The Russian IEA never said any such thing about the CRU. Cuccinelli’s brief is not very reliable because he bases his evidence on a Russian political operative who accused the Hadley Center of ignoring weather stations, while Cuccinelli---who claims he is citing this Russian---blames the CRU for ignoring weather stations. It is strange that the Russian "experts" cited by RIA Novosti accused the Hadley Center of dropping Russian weather stations because the Hadley Center records sea-surface temperatures (SST) while the CRU records land temperatures.

On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory.Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country’s territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports.Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.

If Cuccinelli actually read the accusation he "cites" in RIA Novosti, how did he ever manage to write CRU instead of the oft-named Hadley Center, or Hadley Centre according to the British Spelling?The RIA Novosti article is propaganda, but the article never said that the "CRU probably tampered with Russian climate data." On the contrary, the Russians claimed that the "Hadley Center for Climate Change...probably tampered with Russian-climate data." Cuccinelli's brief isn't citing his "authoritative" Russian IEA source correctly at all. It's a real mystery how this mistake occurred.

According to Tim Lambert at the Deltoid blog, the "Russian [IEA] analysis confirms 20th century CRU temperatures" (12-17-09): [T]he IEA report does not support the claims made in the news story. I've reproduced the final graph from the report below. The red curve is the temperature trend using the 121 Russian stations that CRU has released data for, while the blue hockey stick is from a larger set of 476 stations. I've put them on top of the CRU temperatures for northern extratropics. The red and blue curves agree very well in the period after 1950, thus confirming the CRU temperatures. Well done, IEA!The red and blue curves do diverge in the 19th century, but the one that provides more support for anthropogenic global warming is the blue hockey stick. The red curve shows warming in the 19th century before there were significant CO2 emissions, so it weakens the case that global warming is man-made. If CRU (not HAdley as claimed in the Russian news story) have "tampered" with the data, it would seem that they must have been trying to make a case against AGW.The IEA analysis is, in any case, misguided. CRU has not released all the station data they use, so the red curve is not the CRU temperature trend for Russia at all. If you want that, all you have to do is download the gridded data and average all the grid cells in Russia. You have to wonder why the IEA did not do this.Since Russia is a pretty fair chunk of the land north of 30 degrees north, the CRU graph above is a rough approximation of the what the CRUTEM3 trends for Russia is, and you can see that it looks like the blue curve and not the red one.Steve McIntyre will no doubt be demanding the IEA's data and code for their study. No doubt. [See the entire article and the graph.]For the record, scroll down to read the entire RIA Novosti article (which is also total BS):KommersantRussia affected by ClimategateA discussion of the November 2009 Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident, referred to by some sources as "Climategate," continues against the backdrop of the abortive UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen (COP15) discussing alternative agreements to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that aimed to combat global warming.The incident involved an e-mail server used by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, East England. Unknown persons stole and anonymously disseminated thousands of e-mails and other documents dealing with the global-warming issue made over the course of 13 years.Controversy arose after various allegations were made including that climate scientists colluded to withhold scientific evidence and manipulated data to make the case for global warming appear stronger than it is.Climategate has already affected Russia. On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory.Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country's territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports.Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world's land mass. The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration.Global-temperature data will have to be modified if similar climate-date procedures have been used from other national data because the calculations used by COP15 analysts, including financial calculations, are based on HadCRUT research.RIA Novosti is not responsible for the content of outside sources.

Good morning. The arrests conducted early this morning by our agents in San Juan and the charges outlined in the indictment are the culmination of a two-year undercover investigation that targeted the alleged corrupt activities of state and local law enforcement officials in Puerto Rico. As mentioned by Attorney General Holder, the investigation, known as “Operation Guard Shack” is the largest law enforcement corruption investigation in the 102-year history of the FBI. It involved an unprecedented level of logistical coordination of resources, technical assistance by more than 30 of the FBI’s 56 field divisions, and hand-in-hand coordination with the Department of Justice, the United States Attorney’s Office in San Juan, and the Police Department of Puerto Rico. At some point, all agents assigned to the San Juan office assisted in the investigation.

It is important to recognize that the vast majority of law enforcement officers are honest in their work and are committed to serving and protecting the public. Today we are focused on a small percentage of officers who chose to abuse the public’s trust for their own personal gain.

Combating public corruption is the FBI’s top criminal investigative priority, and it is different than most other crimes. It strikes not only at the heart of good government, but it also jeopardizes at the security of our communities and our nation. Public corruption erodes public confidence, and undermines the strength of our democracy. The allegations in today’s indictment underscore our commitment to aggressively pursue those who engage in unethical and corrupt practices.

Investigating public corruption is a complex mission the FBI takes very seriously. It requires tremendous resources including personnel and the tools necessary to conduct undercover investigations and effectively conduct court-authorized electronic surveillance.

Rooting out corruption is exceptionally difficult. Many of our investigations start with a tip from someone who’s been victimized by public corruption. The American people are growing increasingly intolerant of public corruption—and their intolerance is reflected in their willingness to come forward and report abuse. We are always grateful for those who have come forward to report corruption.

In the end, it does not matter if corruption is national or local. It does not matter if it is one officer or one hundred. There is no level of acceptable corruption. The violation of trust is the same and the American public won’t stand for it.

Success requires strong partnerships. Today’s Indictment could not have been returned without the collaborative efforts of the prosecutors from the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice, the U.S. Attorneys Office in Puerto Rico, and the Police Department of Puerto Rico.

Lastly I would personally like to thank the men and women of the FBI who were involved in today’s actions for their commitment to make this country a better and safer place.

Foreign Corporations Buying American Politicians and Sponsoring Tea Party Movement

"In Western Europe, Moscow has operated by making lucrative arrangements with foreign energy companies that become de facto lobbyists for the Kremlin within their own countries."---"Why The Russia Spy Story Really Matters" (RFE/RL, 7-9-10)“Lucrative arrangement” means the Russians pay their partners more than a deal is worth because the Russians want their foreign business partners to do double duty as Kremlin lobbyists.

I have been trying to find out if Virginia's Attorney General Cucinelli is receiving money from European and perhaps even Russian fossil fuel companies because Cuccinelli's father, whose company donates to his son's political campaign, is a gas marketing expert who boasts of his "European" clients. The people who sell natural gas in Europe are mainly the Russians.

Cuccinelli's deputy, W. Russell, never responds to my requests for more information about the elder Cuccinelli's clients, even though the father's company donated over 96,000 dollars to Cuccinelli's campaign. I wonder if the elder Cuccinelli's clients are really paying for the services of our Attorney General, who persecutes the climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann. What I found out is here.

Since Cuccinelli's office won't be transparent about who the elder Cucccinelli's clients are and what services they are being provided, I will be voting for Democrats this fall. I am no longer going to vote for a party that is getting foreign money to persecute our great scientists.In 1776, we fought a revolution because foreign tyrants were oppressing our people. Now Americans can vote, so we should not be voting for politicians who accept money from foreign corporations who are oppressing our people. I am a capitalist, but big businesses have to be responsible, patriotic citizens and work with scientists who are trying to stop global warming.

Some Republican demogogues like Virginia's Attorney General Cuccinelli compare President Obama to the tyrant King George and try to incite a revolution in the name of "states' rights." This is pretty hypocritical, since Republican denialists are taking money from powerful foreign interests who want to subvert our federal government. These Republicans just want power and money; they don't care about the public interest at all. I was a Republican for 40 years, but I want nothing to do with them any more.

Now, the U.K. Guardian (10-24-10) has published an article which reveals that European, not just American, companies are funding the Tea Party Movement and global warming denialist Senators:

BP and several other big European companies are funding the midterm election campaigns of Tea Party favourites who deny the existence of global warming or oppose Barack Obama's energy agenda, the Guardian has learned.An analysis of campaign finance by Climate Action Network Europe (Cane) found nearly 80% of campaign donations from a number of major European firms were directed towards senators who blocked action on climate change. These included incumbents who have been embraced by the Tea Party such as Jim DeMint, a Republican from South Carolina, and the notorious climate change denier James Inhofe, a Republican from Oklahoma.The report, released tomorrow, used information on the Open Secrets.org database to track what it called a co-ordinated attempt by some of Europe's biggest polluters to influence the US midterms. It said: "The European companies are funding almost exclusively Senate candidates who have been outspoken in their opposition to comprehensive climate policy in the US and candidates who actively deny the scientific consensus that climate change is happening and is caused by people."Obama and Democrats have accused corporate interests and anonymous donors of trying to hijack the midterms by funnelling money to the Chamber of Commerce and to conservative Tea Party groups. The Chamber of Commerce reportedly has raised $75m (£47m) for pro-business, mainly Republican candidates."Oil companies and the other special interests are spending millions on a campaign to gut clean-air standards and clean-energy standards, jeopardising the health and prosperity of this state," Obama told a rally in California on Friday night....

The Cane report said the companies, including BP, BASF, Bayer and Solvay, which are some of Europe's biggest emitters, had collectively donated $240,200 to senators who blocked action on global warming – more even than the $217,000 the oil billionaires and Tea Party bankrollers, David and Charles Koch, have donated to Senate campaigns.The biggest single donor was the German pharmaceutical company Bayer, which gave $108,100 to senators. BP made $25,000 in campaign donations, of which $18,000 went to senators who opposed action on climate change. Recipients of the European campaign donations included some of the biggest climate deniers in the Senate, such as Inhofe of Oklahoma, who has called global warming a hoax.The foreign corporate interest in America's midterms is not restricted to Europe. A report by ThinkProgress, operated by the Centre for American Progress, tracked donations to the Chamber of Commerce from a number of Indian and Middle Eastern oil coal and electricity companies.Foreign interest does not stop with the elections. The Guardian reported earlier this year that a Belgian-based chemical company, Solvay, was behind a front group that is suing to strip the Obama administration of its powers to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. [See full text.]

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Come the Revolution: UVA Defies the Tyrant Cuccinelli!

"Scientists are proud of UVA for standing up to this relentless rubbish," said Francesca Grifo, director of UCS's Scientific Integrity Program. "This investigation has never been about fraud or the facts. Cuccinelli is abusing his power to fight a public relations war against scientific findings."---Union of Concerned Scientists (10-21-10)The Union of Concerned Scientists (10-21-10) chronicles UVA's defiance of the tyrant Cuccinelli:

University of Virginia Continues to Stand Up to Ken Cuccinelli's Politically Motivated Attack on Climate Scientist

WASHINGTON (October 21, 2010) – Yesterday, the University of Virginia made two court filings in its fight against Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's politically motivated investigation of climate scientist Michael Mann.

In its most strongly-worded court filing to date (pdf), UVA characterized Cuccinelli's investigation as "an unprecedented and improper governmental intrusion into ongoing scientific research" and said that Cuccinelli is targeting Mann because he "disagrees with his academic research regarding climate change."UVA also argued that Cuccinelli's latest demand for documents related to Mann's research, filed in September, repeated the same exact arguments a county court judge rejected in August and added no new justifications for his investigation. The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) examined Cuccinelli's original arguments and found they recycled discredited attacks on Mann and his colleagues."Scientists are proud of UVA for standing up to this relentless rubbish," said Francesca Grifo, director of UCS's Scientific Integrity Program. "This investigation has never been about fraud or the facts. Cuccinelli is abusing his power to fight a public relations war against scientific findings."In a separate filing (pdf), UVA also asked the county court to put the case on hold while the Virginia Supreme Court resolves an appeal Cuccinelli filed seeking to overturn a previous August ruling rejecting his investigation. The university argued that putting the case on hold would save the court system time and resources because the cases involve the same parties and the same arguments. UVA already has spent $350,000 fighting Cuccinelli's investigation."UVA realizes more than anyone – save perhaps Michael Mann – what a waste of time and resources this investigation has become," Grifo said. "It's ironic that Ken Cuccinelli, who so vociferously opposes increased government spending, can waste taxpayer money with an entirely gratuitous investigation."

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Bill Maher Mocks Global Warming Denialists

Bill Maher has a very funny sketch on global warming. I don't always agree with Maher's political views, but his mockery of the "Mr. Potato Heads" who deny global warming is right on target. I saw this sketch on a site called DeSmogBlog.

Remembering Ambassador Richard T. Davies

"As the American envoy in Warsaw from 1973 to 1978, Mr. [Richard] Davies established regular contacts with Cardinal Karol Wojtyla, the Roman Catholic archbishop of Kracow. Thanks to his reports, Cardinal Wojtyla, an important Polish opposition figure, was no longer an unknown entity in Washington when he became Pope John Paul II in 1978."---New York Times (4-3-05) [See also the Washington Post (4-4-05) obituary.]The Wyoming-born diplomat Ambassador Richard T. Davies was a good friend of Pope John Paul II. They were both 84 years old when they died. The Pope was born on May 18, 1920. Ambassador Davies was born ten days later on May 28, 1920. The two friends died within a day of each other. The Pope died on April 2, 2005 and Ambassador Davies followed his friend on April 3, 2005.

The "Polish Pope" gave his support to the independent trade union Solidarity and has been credited with helping end communism; but perhaps he had a little bit of help from Ambassador Davies, who worked tirelessly for human and religious rights in communist-dominated areas.

The Roman Catholic Church, under the leadership of Pope John Paul II, was a very powerful supporter of the union and was greatly responsible for its success. Lech Wałęsa, who himself publicly displayed Catholic piety, confirmed the Pope's influence, saying: The Holy Father, through his meetings, demonstrated how numerous we were. He told us not to be afraid[8].

In addition, the priest Jerzy Popiełuszko, who regularly gave sermons to the striking workers, was eventually killed by the Communist regime for his association with Solidarity.

Father Popiełuszko, who was only 37 years old when he was murdered, has been recognized as a martyr by the Catholic Church, and was beatified in Warsaw on June 6, 2010 in Warsaw's Piłsudski Square. Beatification is a step on the road to sainthood. During his life, Radio Free Europe broadcast Father Popiełuszko's sermons which became famous throughout Poland for their uncompromising stance against the communist regime.

FBI Investigates Threats Against Climate Scientists!

"Two of the scientists involved in "Climategate" – the e-mail hacking incident at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, UK – have been emailed death threats since the contents of their private e-mails were leaked to the world. No further information can be revealed about these particular threats at present because they are currently under investigation with the FBI in the United States."---U.K. Guardian (12-8-09)The U.K. Guardian (12-8-09) reports that the FBI is investigating threats made against our climate scientists. There is concern that ignorant, unstable people who are incited by denialist propagandists such as Virginia's Attorney General Cuccinelli may attempt to harm climate scientists who publish articles about global warming.

Denialist propagandists such as Virginia's Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli are supported by the fossil fuel intests. Cuccinelli's father has been a career gas lobbyist. The elder Cuccinelli touts his experience as a gas expert and boasts of his "European" clients. I would like to know if the elder Cuccinelli represents fossil fuel companies, perhaps even Russian fossil fuel companies. The arrogant Attorney General's office does not respond to such questions, but the elder Cuccinelli's business gave the younger Cuccinelli over 96,000 in campaign contributions.As my blog has often noted, the Kremlin-financed satellite channel Russia Today also spreads denialist propaganda. The Russian LUKoil also paid for the translation of a denialist manifesto published by the President of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Klaus.

Friday, October 22, 2010

The great Russian human rights activist Galina Starovoitova was murdered in 1998. An alleged accomplice in her murder, Sergei Kovalev ("Uzbek"), has been arrested. This man should not be confused with another famous Russian human rights activist and associate of Starovoitova's who is also named Sergei Kovalev.

An alleged accomplice of a former Russian Duma deputy suspected of involvement in the killing in 1998 of politician Galina Starovoitova has been detained in St. Petersburg, RFE/RL's Russian Service reports.

Criminal investigators say that Sergei Kovalev, known in criminal circles as "Uzbek," is suspected of helping to organize the killing of three Russian citizens -- including former Duma Deputy Vyacheslav Shevchenko -- in Cyprus in 2004.

Police officials in St. Petersburg told journalists that Kovalev claims to have followed former Duma deputy Mikhail Glushchenko's instructions in threatening Shevchenko and his family in an effort to extort $10 million in 2003.

Glushchenko, 53, was an active member of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia in the Duma in the 1990s. He fled Russia in 2000 after media reports of his possible involvement in the killing of Duma deputy Starovoitova, a well-known reformist politician and minority rights activist.

Glushchenko was arrested in St. Petersburg in June 2009 on suspicion of organizing the Cyprus killings when he returned to Russia from abroad and tried to apply for a new passport.

Yevgeny Vyshenkov, the deputy director of the Investigative Journalism Agency in St. Petersburg, told RFE/RL it is too early to draw any conclusions from Kovalev's statements. Vyshenkov said Kovalev's alleged confessions might be part of a deal he made with investigators.

But Vyshenkov added that Kovalev's arrest is important as it allows police to keep Glushchenko in detention while the investigation continues.

Sunday, October 17, 2010

The FBI's Top Priority Among Criminal Investigations: Public Corruption!

"Public corruption poses a fundamental threat to our national security and way of life...The FBI is singularly situated to combat this corruption, with the skills and capabilities to run complex undercover operations and surveillance."---FBI Public Corruption site

FBI agents often go undercover when they investigate cases of public corruption, one of their top priorities.

It’s our top priority among criminal investigations—and for good reason.

Public corruption poses a fundamental threat to our national security and way of life. It impacts everything from how well our borders are secured and our neighborhoods protected…to verdicts handed down in courts…to the quality of our roads, schools, and other government services. And it takes a significant toll on our pocketbooks, wasting billions in tax dollars every year.The FBI is singularly situated to combat this corruption, with the skills and capabilities to run complex undercover operations and surveillance.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Grand Junction Sentinel Reports: Ward Churchill Can't Get His Job Back at the University of Colorado

The Grand Junction Sentinel (10-13-10) in Grand Junction, Colorado, is reporting that the discredited plagiarist and ex-professor Ward Churchill will not get his job back at the University of Colorado in Boulder. No other papers are reporting this story, and I can't seem to access the full story at the Sentinel even though I am registered. A Churchill site is reporting that the court will hear oral arguments in Churchill's case on October 20, so the Sentinel report is a bit of a surprise. Take this apocryphal report with a grain of salt. I think something funny may be going on here. This sounds like an old story from 2009 that somehow was posted by devilish little gremlins!

Fired University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill can’t get his job back and won’t get $1 million, either, a judge ruled Tuesday. Denver District Judge Larry Naves said in a 42-page decision that reinstating Churchill at the Boulder campus would suggest to “the broader academic community that the department of ethnic studies tolerates research misconduct.” [Full text.]

Monday, October 11, 2010

"Strange Scholarship in the Wegman Report" by John R. Mashey

"From start to finish, this entire effort [The Wegman Report] was created to mislead the US Congress, the USA and the rest of the world. It still is used that way...

George Mason University ought to investigate many problems, as should several other universities and journals, the US Office of Research Integrity and perhaps the American Statistical Association (ethics issues). At least 4 agencies may have possible fund mis-uses to consider. Some authors or publishers might pursue copyright issues. Congress and the DoJ should investigate the manufacture of the Wegman Report. Possible felonies are covered by the US Code, 18.U.S.C §1001 (misleading Congress), §371 (conspiracy), §4(misprision), which might involve many more people. The report lists about 30 issues, not all for Wegman Report itself, but including derivations and related activities."---John R. Mashey, "Strange Scholarship in the Wegman Report: A Façade for the Climate Anti-Science PR Campaign" (9-26-10)

The Deep Climate site has posted a very complicated, 250-page document authored by the prominent Silicon Valley computer scientist John R. Mashey. The document is titled "Strange Scholarship in the Wegman Report: A Façade for the Climate Anti-Science PR Campaign" (9-26-10). Dr. Mashey notes that his report may be updated.The appearance of this document is a huge development because Virginia's Attorney General Cuccinelli has used the Wegman Reportto harrass and defame the climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann and to discredit the science of climate change; but on October 8, 2010, the media reported that the climate change denialist Dr. Edward J. Wegman is being investigated by the George Mason University for research misconduct (plagiarism and fabrications) in connection with the Wegman Report.

Dr. Raymond S. Bradley, a climate scientist at the University of Massachuchetts, initiated the investigation when he complained that his book Paleoclimatology: Reconstructing Climates of the Quaternary had been plagiarized in the Wegman Report.It is amazing that Wegman would plagiarize Dr. Bradley since Dr. Bradley happens to be a co-author of the 1998 and 1999 "hockey stick" articles that the Wegman Report attempts to discredit!

Bradley says he wrote a letter in April to GMU, noting the possibility of plagiarism and demanding an investigation of both the 2006 report and a subsequent, federally-funded study published by some of Wegman's students. "Talk about irony. It just seems surreal (that) these authors could criticize my work when they are lifting my words."

I think that Attorney General Cuccinelli has hijacked the Attorney General's Office to benefit his patronsin the fossil fuel industry. He packages propaganda as "science" and tries to sell his pseudoscientific snake oil to unsuspecting voters.

I think that Attorney General Cuccinelli is a political thug who has hijacked the Attorney General's Office in order to persecute Dr. Mann on behalf of his patrons in the fossil fuel industry. Cuccinelli's patrons may even include Russian gas companies, which collaborate closely with the Russian government's political operations; but Cuccinelli's office has not yet disclosed the identities of his father's clients.

GMU spokesman Daniel Walsch confirms that the university, located in Fairfax, Va., is now investigating allegations that the Wegman report was partly plagiarized and contains fabrications. Last month, a 250-page report on the Deep Climate website written by computer scientist John Mashey of Portola Valley, Calif., raised some of these concerns. Mashey says his analysis shows that 35 of the 91 pages in the 2006 Wegman report are plagiarized (with some of the text taken from a book, Paleoclimatology: Reconstructing Climates of the Quaternary, by Raymond Bradley of the University of Massachusetts) and contain erroneous citations of data, as well...

"Clearly, text was just lifted verbatim from my book and placed in the (Wegman) report," says Bradley, who is also one of the authors of the 1999 Nature study. In response to earlier concerns raised by the Deep Climate website, Bradley says he wrote a letter in April to GMU, noting the possibility of plagiarism and demanding an investigation of both the 2006 report and a subsequent, federally-funded study published by some of Wegman's students. "Talk about irony. It just seems surreal (that) these authors could criticize my work when they are lifting my words."

In a July 28, 2010, letter to Bradley, GMU vice-president for research Roger Stough said he expected a university committee to complete its investigation of Wegman by the "end of September." University policies allow professors to appeal any finding of misconduct within 30 days. The university president has 100 days to respond to that appeal.

The investigation was first reported by USA Today, which quoted GMU statistics professor Edward Wegman as saying he knew of the investigation but he had been asked not to comment about it by the university.

Wegman headed up a 2006 congressional committee that reported problems with scientific research that showed the earth has experience rapid, recent warming, notably a 1999 paper by then-University of Virginia professor Michael Mann.

The Wegman Report was cited repeatedly in the civil subpoena filed last week by Cuccinelli's office to the University of Virginia seeking e-mails and documents related to Mann. The citations came in an attachment to the subpoena intended to show that there was reason to believe that Mann might have committed fraud as he sought state money for research.

Cuccinelli says he wants to investigate a $214,000 grant Mann received from the state. Mann says the grant funded research unrelated to climate change, but the civil investigative demand alleges that he might have used his earlier research on the topic to help get the funding.

In the subpoena, lawyers for Cuccinelli noted that the Wegman Report found the data in Mann's articles "poorly documented and archived."

But now it turns out that Wegman and his report are the subject of scrutiny as well. Other scientists have been posting analyses of his work online, indicating that portions are plagiarized and that the report contains inaccurate citations.

Dan Walsch, a spokesman for GMU, confirmed that the university was investigating charges that the report was plagiarized and that it contained inaccurate information.

Referring to the university's faculty handbook, he indicated such charges are investigated by a faculty grievance committee that turns over its findings to the university president. According to the handbook, tenured professors can be terminated for "violations of professional ethics" or for "a finding of research or scholarly misconduct."

USA Today quotes University of Massachusetts professor Raymond Bradley, a co-writer of Mann's 1999 paper, as saying he wrote GMU a letter in April raising concerns about Wegman's report. Scientists examining the Wegman report have found text that appears to be taken from Bradley's work. He received a letter from the university indicating that it anticipated completing an investigation into the charges by the end of September.

It's worth noting that climate change science has become such a hot potato that professors on both sides have come under scrutiny. Pennsylvania State University convened a panel to investigate charges of professional misconduct by Mann this year. It concluded that there was no evidence Mann falsified or suppressed data.

Cuccinelli, meanwhile, is trying to withstand scrutiny from a judge, who had found that an earlier demand for documents from U-Va. insufficiently explained why Cuccinelli had reason to believe that Mann might have committed fraud.We've asked Cuccinelli's office for reaction to news of the GMU investigation and we'll bring you any response we receive.

At UNOOSA [Mazlan Othman] deals with issues of international cooperation in space, prevention of collisions and space debris, use of space-based remote sensing platforms for sustainable development, coordination of space law between countries, and the risks posed by near-earth asteroids, among other topics.

In September 2010, several news sources reported the United Nations would soon appoint Othman to be the ambassador for extraterrestrial contact[7][8], apparently basing their claims on remarks she made suggesting that the UN coordinate any international response to such contact, and her scheduled appearance on a Royal Society panel that October, "Towards a scientific and societal agenda on extra-terrestrial life."[9] However, a UN spokesperson dismissed the reports as "nonsense," saying there was no plan to expand the mandate of UNOOSA[10], and in an email to The Guardian, Othman stated, "It sounds really cool but I have to deny it."[11] She later explained that her talk would illustrate how extra-terrestrial affairs could become a topic of discussion at the UN, using as an example the advocacy that led to UN discussion of near-Earth objects and space debris.[12]The U.K. Guardian (9-27-10) has penned a witty riposte to Mr. Leake's apocryphal article and proudly adds an update noting that their article has even become "the subject of a legal complaint" made by Jonathan Leake, the foolish "science" editor of The Sunday Times, which is owned by the media mogul Rupert Murdoch.

This is not the first time that a major news organization has reported alien landings. When communism was ending, the boring scriveners who toiled away at Telegraph Agency of the Soviet Union (TASS) were not getting paid; so they morphed into capitalists and penned fantastic skazki in order to make money. Still, the tall tales from TASSwere considerably more entertaining than Jonathan Leaky's credulous scribblings in The Sunday Times.

If a Martian, proverbial or otherwise, had landed on Earth in the last 24 hours the media had some practical advice. Or so it seemed. According to the Sunday Times and numerous other media outlets that followed up the story, the United Nations was "poised" to appoint an individual to be the first point of contact with aliens.Malaysian astrophysicist Mazlan Othman was being lined up for the role, the story said. As head of the UN's Office for Outer Space Affairs (Unoosa) Othman would be the "nearest thing we have to a take me to you leader [person]", Prof Richard Crowther, from the UK Space Agency, told the Sunday Times.According to the paper, Othman is due to tell a Royal Society conference that as the detection of extraterrestrial life is more likely than ever, the UN needs to be ready to co-ordinate humanity's response.Reading all this our Martian visitor might have been encouraged to try to get in touch. They would have had a frustrating time.The Royal Society knew nothing about it. The United Nations referred all queries to the switchboard of Unoosa in Vienna. Its switchboard number wasn't much help. "The person at extension 4951 is unavailable, please leave your message after the tone," it said. Those messages might make for some interesting listening today.Finally an email from Othman herself would have prompted our Martian to trudge back to his spaceship. "It sounds really cool but I have to deny it," she said of the story. She will be attending a conference next week, but she'll be talking about how the world deals with "near-Earth objects".Our alien will just have to try someone else, or stop reading the Sunday Times.

This document draws upon recent evidence and builds on the Fourth Assessment Report of Working Group I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), published in 2007, which is the most comprehensive source of climate science and its uncertainties."

The Royal Society, the UK’s national academy of science, has today launched a new short guide to the science of climate change. The guide has been written to summarise the evidence and to clarify the levels of confidence associated with the current scientific understanding of climate change. It makes clear what is well-known and established about the climate system, what is widely agreed but with some debate about details, and what is still not well understood.Climate change: a summary of the science, describes how and why the earth is currently warming, and explains the wide range of independent measurements and observations which underpin this understanding. It shows that there is strong evidence that over the last half century, the earth’s warming has been caused largely by human activity. It also explains the uncertainty involved in predicting the size of future temperature increases. There are many potentially serious consequences of climate change, so that important decisions need to be made. The guide concludes that, as in many other areas, policy choices will have to be made in the absence of perfect knowledge, but that the scientific evidence is an essential part of public reasoning in this complex and challenging area.John Pethica, Vice-President of the Royal Society and Chair of the working group that wrote the document said: “Climate change is an important issue affecting everyone. Much of the public debate on climate change is polarised at present, which can make it difficult to get a good overview of the science. This guide explains where the science is clear and established, and also where it is less certain. It is not a simple guide, as this is not a simple issue. This summary has been produced for all who want to understand the full range of the scientific evidence.”The guide has been prepared by leading international scientists, mostly drawn from the Fellowship of the Society, and it is based on very extensive published scientific work. The working group drew on input from a wide range of experts and the document was reviewed by both Fellows and others with a broad range of relevant expertise and experience.